Multipart/Variable Palette Signal Sprites

[Dave]

But if you're just glancing at a signal, that would never work...

Besides it's unrealistic. A signal works so that it's most restrictive aspect is the closest to the driver's Line Of Sight (as I recall, anyway).

Ground signals (there are a couple at Carlisle in the north of England, and in the tunnels at New Street) have the red aspect at the top.

[JGR]

I was thinking of either:
1. Some sort of sign stuck on top of the signal (but I have a feeling that that will look daft).
2. Some sort of sign, etc. hanging off of the side of the signal, (extra light to one side maybe), but getting the perspective right would be a pain, and it would look odd.
3. Some sort of extra symbol on the pole, above/below the presignal bar. (This seems best so far).

If anyone has any more suggestions, please post them...

Changing the red and green lights is such a subtle change that you would have to study the signal to notice it, so it is not very good as a visual indicator.

[wallyweb]

What about a different colour for the pole? Would that be acceptable?

[JGR]

Think of a colour, any colour...

I don't really have anything against that in principle, but you would need to find a colour which is easily distinguishable from the background and from the normal grey, and which doesn't look ridiculous. This rules out: green (grass), white (snow), brown/yellow (desert), pink (ridiculous), etc. So you would probably end up using blue or red.

The cons though I would say are that it wouldn't really look consistent, a screen-full of grey poles, and then one bright $colour one looking out of place, and it's not very realistic; IRL, while you occasionally get various extra lights, plates and symbols stuck on signal poles you don't usually get the signal pole itself painted some bright colour... (at least not that I've seen)

[wallyweb]

Red would be the best colour, however I must agree with you re the consistency. Perhaps if only the 3 or 4 pixels where the lights are attached (Provided they don't conceal that part of the pole)?

EDIT - Belay that suggestion. I just took another look at the png and this would not work either. The best I can see is to perhaps add a fourth light to the pole.

[michael blunck]

What about a different colour for the pole? Would that be acceptable?

Not for me. I´d go with an additional label/sign.

regards
Michael

[Ameecher]

What about a different colour for the pole? Would that be acceptable?

Not for me. I´d go with an additional label/sign.

Agreed, wholeheartedly.

[wallyweb]

What about a different colour for the pole? Would that be acceptable?

Not for me. I´d go with an additional label/sign.

Agreed, wholeheartedly.

Belay that suggestion. I just took another look at the png and this would not work either. The best I can see is to perhaps add a fourth light to the pole.

[AndersI]

Think of a colour, any colour...

Do blinking colors work for train signals? And is there anything else than blinking red available? A Swedish pre-signal has extra blinking green (or white) lights.

http://www.jarnvag.net/banguide/signaler.asp

EDIT: Are you talking about the back side of the signal when you say inverted? If, so, you might want to ignore this post.

[michael blunck]

Do blinking colors work for train signals? And is there anything else than blinking red available? A Swedish pre-signal has extra blinking green (or white) lights.

Back when introducing PBS we experimented with blinking lights, but that fell through, eventually. IMO, that option would only be useful for very rare circumstances, but not as a general solution.

Other than that, we have blinking red and yellow, but there´s no blinking green or white in TTD´s palette.

regards
Michael

[Rob]

Other than that, we have blinking red and yellow, but there´s no blinking green or white in TTD´s palette.

regards
Michael

What about the white dots in the water, isn't that just represented by blinking white ?

[JGR]

How does a shape above/instead of the presignal bar sound?
A coloured circle or rotated square perhaps?

That would be fairly easy to draw & code, and it would be easy to see visually...

[Rob]

Yes I was just thinking of the same sort of thing, like these perhaps.



You could even make these blink in special occasions.

[michael blunck]

What about the white dots in the water, isn't that just represented by blinking white ?

No, that´s a cycle, i.e. including also those diverse blue water colours.

Would it be an idea to check the RL railways for extra signs/labels?

regards
Michael

[Dave]

British Signals would have some decent equivalents but obviously we'd be wanting a generic set.

[wallyweb]

With apologies to Rob for the blatant theft of his avatar, but it inspired me.

The attached image is self explanatory but there are some questions ...
1. I based the default signals on a single colour changing stop/go light. Is the 2-light over/under scheme more appropriate?
2. Did I miss anything?
3. How would the 4-light (or 5-light) tree render at ttdx size?
4. Would it be easily adaptable to country/rail system specific signal schemes?
5. How could it be represented in semaphores?
6. Is there a better way to reorganize it? (What/How?)
7. If it is acceptable, would Uwe be wanting to slaughter us for making him change all the images in his tutorial?

[JGR]

The main problem with that scheme is that you haven't taken into account the fact that a signal can be PBS, through, inverted and restricted (or any combination) simultaneously. So you would you would need an ungodly number of lights.
Also there are programmed signals, which in effect are another two pre-signal types (so they could be done using this scheme, turn 3rd light from top blue or some other colour.

Additionally there would be no way to determine the characteristics of a signal facing directly away from you.

It would be easy to cook up using joined sprites and/or recolours though...

In fact, thinking about it, through signals allow signals to pass the "wrong" way through a one-way signal, so they are better off alone on the other side, not on the "correct" signal side, so they are not really an issue.

JGR

[wallyweb]

The main problem with that scheme is that you haven't taken into account the fact that a signal can be PBS, through, inverted and restricted (or any combination) simultaneously. So you would you would need an ungodly number of lights.

I didn't know that. Also, I was concerned as it is with using 4 or 5 lights in the tree.

Also there are programmed signals, which in effect are another two pre-signal types (so they could be done using this scheme, turn 3rd light from top blue or some other colour.

I had omitted programed signals as they would be very specialized where used and the player would be well aware of those. But then if blue lights are acceptable ...

Additionally there would be no way to determine the characteristics of a signal facing directly away from you.

The signal type lights could be repeated on the back side?

It would be easy to cook up using joined sprites and/or recolours though...

In fact, thinking about it, through signals allow signals to pass the "wrong" way through a one-way signal, so they are better off alone on the other side, not on the "correct" signal side, so they are not really an issue.

[krtaylor]

This would actually make the B&O or PRR-style circular pattern signals of some use in TTD. Right now they're kind of overkill, but if they were reworked to implement this, well, they'd have just about enough positions to fit the bill.

[Ben1338]

JGR. Do your new signals that you made work for ottd?